User talk:Diosus
--[[User:Austin8310|'Austin8310']]-YOU MAGGOTS!-Private Eastshield 19:20, August 8, 2010 (UTC) Ben Hun pic The Ben Hun picture was just made by me a long time ago when I decided to make an improved Ben Hun pic. As in this wiki's continuity (such as Phreaky Phriday), Ben Hun (the character) is associated with being stupid and annoying (no offence). So I made a picture with (back then) advanced shading and cool effects. I will fix it up in order to make it better and less OOC. --Error 404: Signature not found. Possible reasons why this may have happened are: Not found. 02:08, September 15, 2010 (UTC) Tada! Dundedundun! Here is Ben Hun, completely redone! What do you think?--Error 404: Signature not found. Possible reasons why this may have happened are: Not found. 03:22, September 15, 2010 (UTC) RE: Antican The reference grammar's too long to just post. Plus, you probably won't get at least half of it. ' ' [[User:Explorer 767|'Explorer 767']] ([[User talk:Explorer 767|'Obey the Benny. Serve the Benny. Live... for the Benny.']]) View this template 20:08, September 16, 2010 (UTC) re:I want it back. Okay, we can share it. Citcxirtcem BAAAAAWW to me! 18:14, September 17, 2010 (UTC) Also, do you think you can make characters who are Corrupteers Citcxirtcem BAAAAAWW to me! 18:31, September 17, 2010 (UTC) RE: Inquisition No. I have done far better with it than you, and have used it frequently. The continuity I use would starkly contrast its original, and because I adopted it legally through the processes that be, I own it. I strongly enjoy the Inquisition and use it every now and then, so I do not plan on relenquishing it back to you. --† TurtleShroom™! Jesus Loves You and Died for You!! † :) :) Nangnangnangnangnang.... † 1 - 2 † [[special:contributions/TurtleShroom| How would you like an extremely large sum of money? -and some new pants. ]]– –''' 13:03, September 18, 2010 (UTC) RE: Apology You've been long-forgiven, Ben Hun. :) --† TurtleShroom™! Jesus Loves You and Died for You!! † :) :) Take a cookie. Go ahead; they're not poison. † † Wikia Staff, you brood of vipers, you hypocrites! – '''– 23:55, October 14, 2010 (UTC) RE: The MM/TS battle Diosus, you are not to reply to this. You are not to encourage or facilitate its growth or anger MM with it. If you agree with either of us, you are not to tell. In reading this message, you agree to comply with these mandates. The issue we fought on was gays' rights. A controversial issue, no man can be a fence-sitter on it; much like abortion, it's one or the other. * Eternalmagma believes that homosexuality is natural and they, like all groups, deserve total equality. This means recognition of gay marriage and fully permitting gays to "be themselves" openly and in public to their hearts' desire. He sees no problems with it and says I have no right to bind them to privte practice alone. He cites the fact that gays are people too, and like you and me, they're human and deserve respect. He wants them to have recognition despite their flaws (and he doesn't see it as a flaw). * I, meanwhile, see homosexuality as an unnatural defiance of nature, genetics, and either as an unholy (but repentable) choice or a sad (but treatable) disease, depending on the one who suffers it (because it can be either). Either way, I view homosexuality as a human flaw that needs to be treated with therapy, medicine, and law. I do not seek to put gays in jail nor to death, not at all, I just don't want to see them flaunting their sin in my face and on my television, in my country's army and on the streets. I want them to do it in private and nowehere else, and I see it as the responsibility of a civil government to do it. It must only be done in the home. My citations are my opinions, genetics, and basic human anatomy, though unlike MM, I have the disadvantage because I am not only seen as crushing an "innocent" but powerful minority, but also a bigot and a discriminating hater. My main basis is Romans 1:24-30, which I admit is dark and cold verse in God's Word, with heavy emphasis on 1:26-27, and 1:30. My stance is the losing side of Romer v. Evans. *MM knows what bans and restrictions would do to gay people, and how it would hurt, while I pay no regard to the people and rather selfishly focus on "treating" the disease and "preserving morality" through medicine and law, respectively. *Both of us have our advantages and disadvantages, and both of us are very well-learned in different sections of the topic for different reasons. We are both very smart and polarized men, which makes both of us unable to win the other over. Each of us has good and bad points, and each of us has a valuable opinion. **MM knows the social, psychological, and everyday aspects of it cover to cover- while I am clueless on it. He can sympathize and respect gay people and seems to understand what it's like to be different. He sees it with commendable warmth and compassion, and he views gays as completely equal. In power, he'd seek to legalize and equalize gays, letting them parade the streets and make out. While he successfully avoids the sin of discrimination and judgement (James 2:9-10), he must allow the sin of homosexuality to be flaunted in full, in violation of Romans 1:24-30, but in adherence to James 2:9-10. **I, meanwhile, look at it from a strictly medical and biological view, disregarding the human factor. I do not sympathize with gays nor respect their glaring flaw (I call it a flaw), and see it as something that must be held back and treated. I stand and judge coldly- I'll admit that -with no sympathy with the person, seeing the disease before the diseased, and even going so far as to avoid gays with all I can. In power, I'd seek to make homosexuality confined forevermore in the home and in private, behind closed doors where no others can see it, using the iron rod of the law, at all costs. Or, in other words, I'd shut the closet, barricade the door, and lock it from the outside, and then eat the key. While my quest would stop the sin of homosexuality, adhering to Romans 1:24-30, I myself am being dark and judgemental and therefore in total violation of James 2:9-10. Am I being sinful in my judgement? Yes. Since God sees all sin as equal, am I as bad as the gays for my transgressions? I think I am right and he is wrong, and he thinks he is right and I am wrong. Each of us cites different facts and each of us present quite a good argument. Neither of us won, and neither of us outdid the other. In fact, I think I lost because I was seen as a cold-hearted extremist in the eyes of several of my good friends, and he the wave of the future. That is the debate. Where you stand may vary or be in between, but don't bring the war up. --20:29, October 15, 2010 (UTC) Re: I was wondering... Dear Diosus, Yes. I do know that you are Ben Hun ever since you had written that blog post. Anyway, I'm sure Alex12345a won't mind if Diosus were his friend. It would be a good addition to his friend list. Like me, Alex likes having friends! Alex001 OR Alex12345a (inbox ⊛ edits ⊛ blog ⊛ hurtandheal ⊛ imagecontest) 02:02, October 19, 2010 (UTC)